Octatrack’s and Synths like Neutron which have no menu diving are two different things. And likewise, if you spend time with the instrument you should not need to be reading every label.
True, also the reason why Rolands own SH-101 became so popular
Or just makes one machine with all the features of every elektron product called the elektron b. … models dream machine.
I didn’t have the neutron in mind, I think it’s fine actually. I was refering to MI stuff (like Peaks), but I guess it was lost in the moderation dance. Anyway these Behringer thread always polarize people, it’s the mac vs pc of our era
I wanna be completely honest about my (objectively) brutal (and strictly personal) opinion about Behringer and expressing it here.
From a post of mine in another forum a couple of years ago:
“ Behringer, that crappy brand! !
They’re awful and I laugh at them.
They’re the audio equivalent of junk food.”
Yeah I know I was harsh, but I stand by my words.
Let me explain in another way with someone else’s words:
"First they came for Mackie, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a pub soundtech.
Then they came for Boss, and I did not speak out—
Because I was into boutique pedals by Z-vex.
Then they came for Peavey Valve amps, and I did not speak out—
Because I am not a shred guitarist.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
This kind of discussion has been going on for years in guitar circles, and probably longer in sound-tech circles.
I’ve got to a point where I just try to vote with my wallet, and ignore the pantomime.
The number one rule for me is:
if it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
A £3 t-shirt from Primani?
A 50p pint of milk?
A £20 guitar pedal?
Someone is getting screwed.”
If it looks too good to be true, it probably is.
This perfectly sums up my reservations about Behringer stuff. You get this amazing sounding synth for 200 or whatever, and the alternative is 600 from Moog or Korg etc. What’s the catch? Just feels fishy.
A £200 guitar pedal, and someone is certainly getting screwed.
Whenever Behringer comes up with something new (which is like every 2 weeks) my mind be like Dikembe Mutombo after one of his Monsterblocks, saying “not in my house” into the face of his opponent.
Go to a supermarket. See ‘Own brand’ everything. Cheap. For people that can’t afford ‘name’ brand.
Listen to a ton of music. Samples. Stolen melodies, stolen patch ideas, stolen chord progressions.
Furniture, architecture, microwaves, TVs, tv shows, lyrics, personalities, shoes, trousers, headphones, cars, phones, branding, advertising…
There’s cloning and stealing left right and centre. Makes objects more attainable for people with less $$ or business growth more possible for people with fewer original ideas but vision elsewhere.
At least behringer are up front about it.
Every person that ever invented anything has lived by the laws of patent and its expiry. Not sure why people are so butthurt over this particular example when they probably turn a blind eye to it elsewhere every minute of their lives. Is the Inventor getting bucks every time you buy a lightbulb? A garment with a zip on it? If people are gonna get moral on this stuff they need to follow through elsewhere too, otherwise it’s just prejudice…
I haven’t bought any of the recent behringer stuff yet. Couple on radar tho. But the most exciting thing is the blatant hunger in an established company which is manifesting in killer bang for buck for customers. Something lacking in a few Others recently…
Just watched the Loopop video of the Neutron, great synth with a few design faux pas, if it wasn’t anything to do with Behringer I almost certainly would have bought one.
Still don’t get why some people seem to think Behringer is the only company making affordable gear, Korg, Roland, Novation, Arturia, Teenage Engineering, and others do too.
Teenage engineering is not affordable btw. Not for the feature list in the pocket operators. Cant really compare any of those pocket operators to a RD-808 or even a crave. If Behringer decided to clone the pocket operators we would be talking lunch money.
now that everyone seems to be moving from software to hardware, Behringer is the modern-day equivalent of when you could buy hacked versions of Reason, Fruity Loops, Logic, Ableton, etc… everyone cries the real thing is too much, has no idea why, and surely there’s another option… there is: stealing.
Cheap is cheap. Korg, TE etc have some cheap stuff in their range. And plectrums are cheap too…but none of that’s the same as making a model d or something like the Crave/Neutron so affordable…totally different.
last i checked all of these companies are still in business and i still find people regularly using this equipment on the job…but also using behringer alongside them
maybe these companies’ sales suffered after behringer came on the scene? possibly–it’d be interesting to see.
but that’s just the nature of capitalism. lots of business from even just 10-20 years ago aren’t in business anymore, or aren’t as big due to competitors.
“first they came for myspace, and I didn’t listen to Tom”
So you’re saying, an original 3 oscilator synth priced at 125€ is less impressive that a 300€ moog clone. I mean defending behringer is reasonable, but honestly, there’s a LOT of other affordable options, and there are reasons why behringer’s stuff is cheaper.
One thing that costs a lot in product manufacturing is quality check. If you cut costs on quality check, it means that the lucky customer gets a perfect machine, but the unlucky one gets a faulty unit they can send back and get a new one, or the most unlucky gets a product that dies just after the warranty is over.
Is it a bad thing ? No ! But, there is a reason things cost what they cost. It might also just be an aggressive pricing strategy to make a name for themselves in this product category (which, seeing this thread, is working).
Then, to be honest I’m not a fan of behringer because of their hypocrisy. I don’t know why but nobody seems to remember that they censored a chinese review site, and they also sued a Dave Smith employee (which cost the company a ton of money in legal fees) while at the same time replicating the pro-1. And this is just in the last year, they have a long history of bad behaviour.
You can make the argument that it happens to every other product category, but music gear and synths in particular did benefit from a pretty healthy environment (in the recent years anyway) and behringer is coming accross as pretty toxic. I’d argue that this thread is getting close to the old Overbridge, where everyone kept on repeating the same argument over and over again without any constructive outcome. Which we can all agree, isn’t fun for anyone.
Patents have reached their end. Nobody is stoping roland from making ultra cool and super genuine remake of analog 808. they don’t want to do it? Too bad.
So why stop Behringer doing it for people who want it at that price?
i love what Behringer is doing. Don’t have the money to burn for expensive snob instruments.
Don’t care what brand it is, as long as device is functional and sound and price is right.
I did not see people complaining that new behringer synths are falling apart.
I did not hear that their synths are sounding bad. So what’s the problem.
They’ve come a long way from being the old behringer.
They acquired Midas Uk, they have great designers there. Doing super popular x32 mixers.
They have also tc electronics and Klark teknik releasing clones of pulteq and la-2a compressors etc.
All very cool gear that everybody can afford. Snobs should be snobs and let others enjoy affordable and quality gear.
Times are changing. Behringer is here and not only people with money will be making cool stuff with nice gear.
Nor me at this point. I am not disagreeing with the Capitalist cry “Let the market decide”, sure there is a market.
But I think there is a sort of hypocrisy when they at the same time ignore the fact that the products we buy, we have to an extent, an intimate relationship with these objects. They become extensions and self-externalizations.
This is the magic of personal ownership and a facet of the success of consumer culture: that there is a sense of not only vanity, but a type of subconscious validation. If we purchase authentic products, we are to an extent reaffirming to ourselves and others we are authentic, or tribalism and social rank. (Referring to the history of marketing psychology and “subliminals”, even researched by the CIA).
Going to get very philosophical here, so a thought:
An interesting thing develops, (staying away from politics), are phenomenon that arises, maybe a socialist-type rejection of this, having been subjected to this incessantly is a kind of utilitarianism, or a resurgence again of individual autonomy: that having become aware of the game, through outright rejection, claim our power again and say who cares? A hammer is a hammer and tools are a means to an end and have no actual value in themselves apart.
So there is a kind of duality present now, in an age of material and information abundance where the only thing that modern economics can be assured of is the desire for us to have freedom of choice, above all.
On a personal level, I like to believe in the power of vibrations. That every object, the food we eat, the places we dwell carry with it energy and “karma”, and this karma effects me on a biological/metaphysical level… or the intent of a thing. Especially for those things I choose for myself which are, biologically speaking, non-essential. I also believe that producers of goods and services have to an extent, a responsibility to culture just as much profit.
And here I thought I just wanted a new drum machine
philosophical indeed: there’s a mountain of sociology & economic/political theory along the lines you’re describing. The glamour of the commodity in itself & distinguished by non-functional characteristics is important in Marx’s theory of Alienation, which is a jumping off point (pro or contra) about the magic possessed by manufactured and crafted items in various degrees.